First, it is to be remarked, that Herodotus particularly designates only those labours as unnecessary for the Egyptians, which in other lands precede seed-sowing. But in Egypt, the burdensome labour, the watering, begins not until after the seed is sown, and this circumstance is made very particularly prominent in our passage. That irrigation is really a very laborious employment, is confirmed by many witnesses. "Forskäl," says Oedmann,1 "has shown that the cultivation of the land in Egypt requires more toil than one would imagine. The watering must be often repeated, and for that purpose the land is intersected by canals. These canals must be cleared out yearly, and sustained by hedges, &c. planted on their banks. And in Shaw,2 it can also be seen with what indescribable pains the water must be conducted through the numerous little channels, to furnish sustenance for the productions of the land, to say nothing of the various machines which are drawn by buffaloes, and are used for carrying up the water to the gardens, after the canals and cisterns are dry." The difficulty of cultivation in Egypt, Girard3 also asserts. A single 'Feddan Doorah '4 sometimes requires, according to him, a hundred days' work of watering. Prokesch says: "The watering is indispensably necessary, and must be performed at stated intervals. It is the custom to water the fields in winter once in fourteen days; in the spring, if the dew falls sufficiently, once in twelve days; but in the summer once in eight days." The same author describes the various machines for irrigation. Finally, Michaud 7 says: "The labour of tillage is not that which most occupies the agricultural population here; for the land is easy to cultivate. The great difficulty is to water the fields; even the most robust of the Fellahs are employed to raise the water and perform the irrigation."

5

Further, it must not be overlooked, that Herodotus speaks only

historiae incusare velis, ejus verba non ad omnem Aegyptum erunt referenda, sed ad unam modo alteramve ejus partem, eximia agrorum fertilitate insignem.

1 Verm. Beitr. 1. S. 126.

3 In the Descr. t. 17, p. 56.

9 Page 172.

The Feddan, the most common measure of land in Egypt, was a few years ago equal to about an English acre. It is now less than an acre. 5 In den Erinnerung. Th. 2. S. 135.

7

6

Correspondence from the East, Vol. VIII. p. 54.

S. 137.

of a single region of Egypt, of that which enjoys the blessings of the Nile in the fullest measure. He explicitly contrasts the inhabitants of the region below Memphis with the rest of the Egyptians. But our passage has particularly in view that part of Egypt which was inhabited by the Israelites. This lay upon the borders of the desert, and the blessings of the Nile could be appropriated to them only by means of the greatest exertions.

Finally, it is to be considered that the Canaan of which the author speaks is in a manner an ideal land. It was never what it might have been, since the bond of allegiance, in consequence of which God had promised to give the land its rain in its season, was always far from being perfectly complied with.

4. That our passage is spoken in opposition to the boasting of the Egyptians, who looked down with proud pity upon all other lands, since these had no Nile, is probable from a comparison of Herodotus, 2. 13, which has a striking relation to our passage: "For when they heard that in all the country of the Greeks the land is watered by rain, and not by rivers, as in Egypt, they said, 'the Greeks, disappointed in their brightest hopes, will sometimes suffer severe famine;' which means, if God at some time shall not send rain, but drought, then famine will press upon them, for they can obtain water only from God." The phrase, only from God,' which seems so terrible to the Egyptians, is here represented as a mark of favour to the people, which has God for its friend, and to which the eyes of the Lord its God are directed from the beginning until the end of the year,

verse 12.

5. The words, "Where thou sowedst thy seed and wateredst it with thy foot as a garden of herbs," shows at least that the author was acquainted with the manner of irrigation in Egypt, and is most easily explained on the supposition that he was acquainted with the manner of life among the Egyptians by personal observation. At the first view, these words appear without doubt to have reference to an Egyptian watering machine described by Philo,' with which they carried the water from the Nile and its canals into the fields. This machine, a wheel for raising water turned by the foot, is even now in use in Egypt. Nevertheless, since the au

1 De Confusione Ling. p. 255.

1

2

thority of Diodorus, for the newness of the invention of this machine, scarcely sufficient of itself, (he mentions that it was invented by Archimedes,) is confirmed by the circumstance that this machine is not represented in the sculptures, whilst the machine, now most common for irrigation, the shadûf, is found even on very ancient monuments,3 it is most natural to refer the words rather to the carrying of the water in which the foot has the most to do. This process we find also represented on the Egyptian monuments. Two men are there employed in watering a piece of cultivated land. They bear upon their shoulders a yoke with straps at each end, to which earthen vessels are fastened. They fill these with water from a neighbouring shadûf or from a pool, and carry it to the field. Another stands there with a bundle of herbs which he appears to have just collected, by which the phrase, like an herb-garden,' is very naturally suggested.

5

6. The whole passage transfers us, in a manner inimitable by a modern writer, to the time in which the Israelites were stationed midway between Egypt and Canaan, yet full of the advantages which they had enjoyed in the former land, and in want of a counterpoise to the longing desire for that which they had lost.

1 I. 34. 5. 37.

Wilk. II. p. 5.

Wilk. I. p. 53. II. p. 4. Ros. II. 1. p. 385.

This does not reach the point, since the passage in question does not seem to refer to the mode of distributing, but of supplying the water. "Possibly," says Dr Robinson, 1. 542, "in more ancient times the waterwheel may have been smaller, and turned not by oxen, but by men pressing upon it with the foot, in the same way that water is still often drawn from wells in Palestine, as we afterwards saw. Niebuhr describes one such machine in Cairo, where it was called Sûkieh tedûr bir rijl, a watering machine that turns by the foot,' a view of which he also subjoins." The testimony in regard to the severity of the labour of irrigation is uniform. Lane, Modern Egyptians, Vol. II. p. 24, speaking of the raising of water by the Shadûf, says, "The operation is extremely laborious." Dr Robinson, p. 541, also remarks: "The Shadûf has a toilsome occupation. His instrument is exactly the well-sweep of New England in miniature, supported by a cross-piece resting on two upright posts of wood or mud. His bucket is of leather or wicker-work. Two of these instruments are usually fixed side by side, and the men keep time at their work, raising the water five or six feet. Where the banks are higher, two, three, and even four couples are thus employed, one above another."

See the engraving from Beni Hassan in Wilk. II. p. 137, and the descrip. in Ros. II. 1. p. 382-3.

DEUTERONOMY xvii. 16.

Among the precepts for the king, Deut. chap. xvii. it is said, verse 16: "Only he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, so that he may multiply horses; for the Lord hath said to you, Ye shall not return back again that way." It was shown in the Contributions,' that the apprehension here spoken of, that the love of horses in the king could finally cause the whole people to return to Egypt, was entirely natural in Moses' time, when a uniting of the band just now severed appears not impossible, when the people from the most trivial cause uttered their longing for Egypt, or even their determination to return,2 but not natural in the period of Solomon and the later kings. Indeed, such a thing could not even have been in Joshua's time, when the people had come to a full consciousness of their national independence, and every thought on the possibility of a re-union with the Egyptians was obliterated. In same place it was also remarked, that Egypt also appears in this passage as the only country in which horses were raised, while indeed, in the age of Solomon, Palestine was to a certain extent distinguished for the same thing, so that it could no longer be supposed that a king who wished to be the possessor of many horses must go to Egypt.

KIND TREATMENT OF THE ISRAELITES BY INDIVIDUAL EGYPTIANS.

DEUT. xxiii. 8, (7.)

In the arrangement concerning those who are to be received into the congregation, and those who are to be excluded, in Deut. xxiii. 8, (7), it is said, "Thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian, because thou wast a stranger in his land." This passage implies that the Israelites received in some respects better treatment from individuals of the Egyptians separately, than from the State, so that the Israelites had cause for grateful regard to them in turn ; since the phrase, "For thou wast a stranger in his land," is not a sufficient reason for the command, "Thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian," unless it means that the Egyptians performed the

1 Th. 3. S. 247-8.

2 See Exod. xiv. 11. Num. xi. 5, seq.; xxi. 5, 7.

offices of hospitality to the Israelites, and earned for themselves the claim of reciprocity. In accurate agreement with this, we read in Exodus that God gave the Israelites, as they were departing, favour with the Egyptians, turned their hearts to them in love and compassion, so that they gave them rich presents for their journey. The agreement is so nice a circumstance between passages so entirely disconnected, is worthy of notice, as also the contents of each passage by itself. It is natural in a representation drawn from acquaintance with the actual condition of things, that the contradictions which real life always furnishes, should come in for a share; a mythic representation, on the contrary, would certainly avoid this apparent contradiction, and would here leave to the Egyptians only hatred and hostility and a correspondent relation of the Israelites to them.

DEUTERONOMY xxiii. 12, 13.

The precepts upon the not defiling of the camp, &c., in Deut. xxiii. 12, 13, reminds us of what Herodotus1 says of the Egyptians "They evμapéŋ Xpéwvraι in houses, and eat without, in the streets; for they think that things which are unseemly, but necessary, must be done in secret; but what is not unseemly, before all the world." 2 If a custom of this kind had been established among the Egyptians, from among whom the Israelites came, it could not be violated by the Israelites without offending against decorum, and the law comes in with its mandates to obviate this difficulty.

THRESHING WITH OXEN, DEUT. XXV. 4.

In Deut. xxv. 4, it is forbidden to muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn. Both ancient writers 3 and the monuments show that oxen were used in Egypt for threshing. Champol

2

1 B. 2. c. 35.

Compare Bähr concerning the varying custom among the Greeks, S. 557.

* See Bähr upon Herodotus. I. p. 508.

4

Wilkinson, in his 2d Ser., Vol. I. p. 85, seq. gives engravings and a description of this same scene at Elethya. His interpretation of the hieroglyphics differs, however, a little from the one in the text, which is taken from Gliddon 66 : Thresh for yourselves, (twice repeated,) O oxen, thresh for yourselves, (twice,) measures for yourselves, measures for your mas